105 pointsby 01-_-4 hours ago9 comments
  • buran772 hours ago
    It's safe to assume that once the secret location of the secretive conference stopped being so secret, the organizers and attendees went looking for a more private venue.
  • AvAn123 hours ago
    Hotel wants to avoid undesirable guests. Seems reasonable.
  • Hoasi3 hours ago
    How is this secretive if venue is public?
    • Fordec3 hours ago
      It wasn't public until a an investigative journalist wrote an article about it after the membership of the group was exposed first. Per TFA:

      > A leaked schedule for the “retreat” hosted by Dialog, an invitation-only group

      • nobodyandproud2 hours ago
        Working as intended. Though Peter Thiel will do his utmost to further destroy journalists, I’m sure.
        • CamperBob2an hour ago
          Some have it coming, like the ones at Gawker. Doesn't excuse anything else Thiel has been connected to, of course, but I don't hold that particular lawsuit against him.
          • nobodyandproud3 minutes ago
            Thiel chose an easy target, and opened the door to destroying journalism.

            As un-American as it gets but hey, he’s the right color with legal bundles of cash; so much for our cherished, upper to middle-class institutions.

          • FireBeyond43 minutes ago
            Gawker was a garbage-tier publication. But I absolutely do hold that particular lawsuit against him:

            Gawker didn't "out" Thiel in any meaningful sense. Yes, they published and it was tacky. But let's be very real: Thiel's social media and profile pictures were full of things like him shirtless on gay cruises and parties at gay nightclubs. The only people who learned Thiel was gay from Gawker were people who had no particular interest in him.

            I also have significant issues with his bankrolling of Hogan's lawsuit against Gawker as an abomination of the legal system, including the right to face one's "accuser":

            - Prior to Thiel's involvement, Hogan had already agreed in principle to a part ownership stake and profits of Gawker. He'd also already settled, and forgiven, the person who gave Gawker the sex tape in the first place.

            - Lawyers paid for by Thiel pushed for him to drop that and push instead for bankrupting Gawker through damages (which were laughable, see below). (Hypothetical question, if you're an attorney, ostensibly representing Hogan, but you know the person paying your bills, Thiel, wants a different outcome for the case, when push comes to shove, whose interests are you going to represent? See the following point too).

            - When the case and awarded damages -did- actually threaten to bankrupt Gawker, Thiel/Hogan's lawyers did the most illogical thing possible, if they were looking to recoup any money for their ostensible client... they dropped the one claim against Gawker that would have allowed their liability insurance to at least partially pay out. Remember, Hogan could use that money far, far more than Thiel.

            (Re damages: The amount that Hogan had originally asked for seemed reasonable. Then after Thiel's lawyers got involved, the amount asked for was multiplied five thousand times.)

            This included economic damages of fifty million dollars. For a man who had made something in the order of $20-25M his entire career? Who had a net worth at its peak of $30M, and at the time of the lawsuit, a NW of $8M? I highly doubt that TV stations pulling reruns of old WWF events, hair loss commercials and other endorsements was worth that. (They separately asked for emotional damages, too, to be clear. But there was near zero justification for this economic damages claim.)

            I wonder how much Thiel paid Hogan under the table for this proxy lawsuit? Because it sure looks like he was playing puppeteer, and while Hogan had every right to be bitter about what Gawker did, his every action to resolve or plan to resolve the matter pivoted 180 degrees the moment "his" lawyers got involved, and perhaps unsurprisingly, the outcome perfectly aligned with Thiel's goals.

    • netsharc3 hours ago
      What did Taylor Swift and many celebs do yesterday at Madison Square Garden (a public venue)? All the news says she got married, but does that mean you're trusting the news media?

      Public venue, private ("secret") event.

    • gofreddygo2 hours ago
      Like area 51.
    • mschuster913 hours ago
      The group used to be pretty secretive and unknown until a hacker managed to discover Dialog not protecting their membership data properly - and found, among others, a shit ton of billionaires [1] and politicians including former German health minister Jens Spahn [2].

      [1] https://www.forbes.com/sites/maryroeloffs/2026/06/18/what-we...

      [2] https://correctiv.org/aktuelles/das-spahn-netzwerk/2026/06/1...

      • dgellow3 hours ago
        Part of the list:

        General Alexus Grynkewich, NATO's supreme allied commander Europe

        Treasury secretary Scott Bessent

        Army secretary Dan Driscoll

        Hallie Hoffman, acting chief of staff of the Drug Enforcement Administration

        Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas)

        Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.)

        Rep. Jim Himes (D-Conn)

        Wes Moore, Maryland governor

        Jared Polis, Colorado governor

        Tom Lue, general counsel and head of governance at Google DeepMind

        Randy Kroszner, a former governor of the Federal Reserve

        Jonathan Greenblatt, chief executive of the Anti-Defamation League

        Peter Goettler, president of the Cato Institute

        Ryan Stowers, executive director of the Charles Koch Foundation

        Roger Myerson, Nobel laureate economist

        Jared Kushner, President Donald Trump’s son-in-law

        Neal Mohan, YouTube CEO

        Scooter Braun, Music manager

        Ezra Klein, political commentator

        Souad Mekhennet, Washington Post reporter

        Joseph Gordon-Levitt, actor

        Sophia Bush, actress

        Rick Warren, evangelical pastor

        Elon Musk ($1.3 trillion)

        Eric Schmidt ($40.1 billion)

        Peter Thiel ($27.8 billion)

        Henry Kravis ($12.2 billion)

        Marcos Galperin ($6.8 billion)

        Mike Cannon-Brookes ($7.7 billion)

        Scott Cook ($4.4 billion)

        Barry Sternlicht ($3.1 billion)

        Nicolas Berggruen ($2.9 billion)

        John Arnold ($2.8 billion)

        Joe Lonsdale ($2.8 billion)

        Reid Hoffman ($2.7 billion)

        • rubyfan2 hours ago
          This is likely more an invite list than a membership list. Not defending it. But it's more like being a high profile, influential or powerful person and being invited to an exclusive conference than it is being a member of SPECTRE.
        • rayiner2 hours ago
          What meaningful complaint can you have about a meeting that includes Ted Cruz on one side and Wes Moore on the other; both Peter Thiel and Reid Hoffman?
          • Terr_2 hours ago
            If you mean in terms of political party leaning, we've had many years to observe how Rich vs Poor can override Right vs Left.
            • rayiner5 minutes ago
              [delayed]
            • XorNotan hour ago
              It does? Because from recent US election results the exact opposite would seem to be true.
            • ares6232 hours ago
              I make $500k/year TC, that means I'm rich right? Right?
              • an hour ago
                undefined
              • HWR_14an hour ago
                I'm trying to understand if you think that you are rich or not. Every time I read it I flip if you are serious or sarcastic.
              • evan_2 hours ago
                $500k is a heck of a lot closer to $0 than it is to $1B
                • FireBeyond41 minutes ago
                  Which shows the great divide plainly. $450K individual TC puts you in the 1% as of 2025.
        • vrganj2 hours ago
          Most shockingly, Kaja Kallas, EU Foreign Representative.
        • krapp2 hours ago
          I want to know what the hell Joseph Gordon-Levitt is planning...
          • thephyberan hour ago
            He has been politically active trying to roll back CDA Section 230 protections for social media companies because he conflates social media algorithms being “editorial” with what actions are actually protected by CDA 230.

            He made an pinned Instagram post about his association with this group (link to his account, not to the post):

            https://www.instagram.com/hitrecordjoe/

          • derektankan hour ago
            He’s involved in the effective altruism movement and Hollywood AI policy
  • an hour ago
    undefined
  • guywithahatan hour ago
    Aren’t most events at hotels “secretive”? Our company all hands certainly isn’t a public event. It’s seems reasonable that defense companies may not always want their events to be public and in newspapers
    • an hour ago
      undefined
    • FireBeyond38 minutes ago
      Advertised? No. Secretive? No.

      In all the company events and such that I've been to at hotels and casinos, there's usually signs in the lobby, "Welcome X", or at least on the screens or signs by conference room doors telling you exactly who is there (I will not pretend, and know, that this is not always the case. But it's generally fairly trivial to figure these things out.)

  • Animats3 hours ago
    "Cult-building" on the agenda?
    • zdw2 hours ago
      While Thiel's recent Antichrist talks could come to mind, this could just as easily be business speak, like in the Collins/Porras "Built to Last" where one of the points of great companies is "Cult-like culture".
      • Animatsan hour ago
        Yes. There are companies which want "passion", which is really about employee motivation. Zappos, which is a shoe store, has been laughed at for this.
      • 2 hours ago
        undefined
    • trencedamp3 hours ago
      I guess if you think you're meeting is a secret then you can just say what your agenda is out in the open.

      I mean there's no question these guys are the baddies, right? Look at every reason Peter Thiel has been in the news for the last year

  • netsharc3 hours ago
    [flagged]
  • pgt2 hours ago
    [flagged]
    • rcxdude2 hours ago
      Hotels cancel events all the time, when they prove to be more trouble than they're worth. In extreme cases, they might cancel the event while it's running and kick out the attendees and organizers.
    • AlpacaJones2 hours ago
      It's a popular hotel in a stunning location. It will do even better after this.

      What sort of eejit other than yourself will think, 'I won't book this hotel because they cancelled a Dialog event'?

    • Natfan2 hours ago
      should a hotel ban nazis who are going there to incite violence? where do you draw the line?
    • 2 hours ago
      undefined
    • wat100002 hours ago
      Nobody's going to be looking for a venue for a wedding or a whale biology conference and think, that hotel looks nice, but they canceled Palantir, so they just can't be trusted.
    • nobodyandproud2 hours ago
      Why is a privately owned hotel compelled to deal with controversy not of its making?

      Perhaps things work differently for those of South African persuasion…

    • esseph2 hours ago
      > If the hotel cancelled it, it's suicide for the hotel.

      This is silly. The hotel will be fine, they could give two fucks about some private party when another will take its place.

  • ares6232 hours ago
    Whatever happened to all those 4channers going after the super secret cabal running the deepstate?
    • krapp2 hours ago
      They voted for the cabal and shot up a pizzeria. Womp womp.
    • 2 hours ago
      undefined